Sidenote: Sequoias are native to the central Sierra and redwoods are native to Northern CA. Carry on!

Mike, you do realize that rules were made to be broken, right.

Mike, you just belittled someone's grief to make your own seem more important. A loss is a loss and shouldn't be determined by what/who was lost, but by the connection the person had to it.

Shut up you cockroach. We all know what you think we don't.

This comment is hidden. Click here to view.

Oscar Finn, apparently you do not know anyone who is a bonafide bereaved parent. I am one (he died at 8 of leukemia) and know many, many others. No matter how the man felt about his tree, it will never compare to the pain of a parent whose child has died. It is considered the most severe and traumatic loss a person can experience. See if your public library has "The Worst Loss" by Barbara Rosof and read it. It can also be ordered used--CHEAP--from the Amazon Marketplace. There is no loss, be it spouse, parent, sibling or other (and all of these are considered severe losses), much less a dog, a cat or a tree (as dear as they may be) compared to the death of one's child at any age. I've compared it to having one's guts ripped out and stomped on with cleats. I've talked with more than enough people in the 16 years since my son's death to know that no other death can be truly compared to the loss of one's child. Be careful with your comparisons, please, sir.

are you okay

That being said, I totally approve of his revenge.

Hahaha, whatever! He's a taxpayer. He had to pay for his own trees destruction and the pavement and you don't see a problem with that?

The environment is more important :)

Waah. Conservatives only ever think about money.

This comment is hidden. Click here to view.

Jerome Gondron- Wow talk about making judgements based on one comment. Im not a conservative, I just follow rules and accept the consequences.

This comment is hidden. Click here to view.

Andrew Keane- No I dont. He doesnt own the sidewalk and if the tree he planted is destroying it then sorry, tree has to go. So you would be OK chipping in if the other trees have to be removed? ALSO, if he was such an arborist, im sure he could have saved parts and regrown it elsewhere.

Don't wanna harm the existing flora, don't p**s off an arborist with a grudge. Seems simple enough.

To Ruth Holmes-Davitt: He planted the tree 30 years ago, perhaps the sidewalk didn't exist at that time. So maybe the question then should have been why they put the sidewalk where it would eventually be impacted by the tree roots?

You think you can manage nature better than nature itself? LOL I've got news for ya, bub.

Aww let the trees live! Freedom!!!! Let people have freedom!

This comment is hidden. Click here to view.

f**k face .... do u have any idea how similar ur thoughts and horse s**t are stupid f**k

This comment is hidden. Click here to view.

You are such a motherfuckiin diplomat... F**k you and F**k you and F**k you thrice. Die m**********r😈

This comment is hidden. Click here to view.

If he is an Arborist why didn't he know that the roots would spread and chose a different tree? IF (and I think it's a pretty big IF) the story is true was he prepared to pay any medical bills arising from injuries caused to young children, the elderly etc who were likely to suffer injuries related to tripping? He's gleeful about the costs involved in repairing damage caused by his trees and removing the trees that he has planted. So he's upset about 'Clyde' but has happily planted trees simply so that they can be killed and that the money used is tax payers money that could of been spent on other services for the community. He's a nasty, spiteful, petty twat .

This comment is hidden. Click here to view.

No one cares about your appeal to libtard tyranny, commie. Get a real job.

Yes

Wendy, the huge sum of money pertains to environmental reparations considering that Redwoods are endangered plant species. The mayor is lucky if he'd get away with simply paying for violating his obligation to uphold a federal law.

I don't see it that way Sherlock. The cost and energy used to bring trees down (and they would if this story was true) are not environmentally sound.

All about money with you people.

there's always a shamer

This comment is hidden. Click here to view.

So you are OK with breaking rules Jerome? Im sure money would be important if it was coming out of your pocket.

Actually, no, Mike. There are plenty of types of redwoods that CAN be cut down, incurring costs to cut them down, also... the types of trees he chose, like the Giant redwoods, are endangered species, and they can NOT be cut down by anyone in California, including the government. So there will be no removal costs, as once the tree is rooted firmly, they are protected. Which is why he waited to announce it after their root had firmly spread. :)

You made this statement "Andrew Keane- No I dont. He doesnt own the sidewalk and if the tree he planted is destroying it then sorry, tree has to go....." I don't live there so I dont know for sure however, the tree is 30 years old correct? How old is the sidewalk? Was it put there prior to 1987? So your saying if city council decides to push sidewalk on your front lawn and oh well Sorry Andrew you house has to go its destroying the sidewalk.

Under exactly what circumstances would you feel it is ethically correct to truly become "all for saving a tree"???? I wipe away a tear for those poor, poor people who might feel themselves to be inconvenienced by a few more majestic trees being brought into this world. Poor people. Poor you. Defender of the values of civilization, time is up for you and your ilk. The spirit of justice has abandoned you.

Arbitrary rules are stupid and harmful

Who are these people who "had nothing to do with it"? And what rules are being broken?

The word in this context is "affected", and I have a giant sequoia in my front yard. It's at least 70ft tall.

Mike, you are a twat, you should hide in the corner of your room, and not speak, let alone be seen in public. No Mike, just no. SMH - somewhere in the world a woman gives birth to a sped like this every 5 minutes, and she must be found and stopped immediately, before the problem gets worse.

He planted California redwoods, not Giant redwoods. And as far as I know, they are regularly cut down by loggers. They are currently considered "only" vulnerable, not endangered.

seriously, you're responding to these commentors like they talked about your sister

dude, are you even a resident there? Ease up

Break what rules?

you can cut that part of the roots in order to keep the tree standing and the line working. Coexist.

Wendy, you apparently not aware of how this works. The roots are cut on the inside if the sewer line and the line is the sleeved on the inside with pipe that is up to current standards. It does not damage older trees or kill them!

There was nothing in the article to support your question. He also had to pay for repairing the concrete and for him cutting the tree. How about we do not presume or add something which was not being done. The fact has he had a tree which he loved and he was ordered to cut it down and pay for it. Seems as if there are few who would have cut the tree down, paid the cost of it and gone about their lives as society dictates. Perhaps at his age, he felt as if his right to "rage, rage against the night." Or in this case against the government of where he lives. Good for him.

Heather, why not the Mayor had his cut down and made him pay for it, what's the difference? Screw with my yard I screw with yours, fair is fair.

This comment is hidden. Click here to view.

I've not heard of that happening in a positive manner. Either it kills the tree or makes the tree structurally unsound, William. I'd hate to be near that tree in heavy wind. But let's just say you can in a safe manner to people and the tree and that these roots miracoulsy do not grow back.Who pays for the damage? Usually damage to sewer lines isn't detected until too late. Who pays to dig and carefully cut root system?

This comment is hidden. Click here to view.

Yes Wendy! Plus the fact that you have no right to plant anything on anyone else's land without permission (especially the mayor's private property).

are you a council shill Wendy? - the council there was ham-fisted and overbearing, the tree was 30 years old and probably there before the footpath - arseholes and environmental vandals - support the guys efforts - he did mainly put them in public spaces so they on't cause private damage - apart from the dipshit mayor

In a general sense, yes. If we would build our communities to incorporate nature (rather than tear out everything so we can jam 5 houses on an acre of land), this world would be a healthier and more beautiful place. We would prevent food deserts for beneficial insects and reduce the negative impact (like pollution, habitat loss, and species extinction) that humans are having on the planet. I would much rather walk on a sidewalk that curves around trees (and the shade they provide), then walk on a straight one and get baked in the sun.